The group criticized the decision to suspend the comedian after comments about the conservative reaction to the alleged shooter of Charlie Kirk, and said that investors were entitled to investigate whether the company’s leaders “did not properly discharge their fiduciary duties” in deciding to bench Kimmel amid threats from the FCC. The fallout, which sparked criticisms that Disney was caving on free-speech issues and drew some threats from Hollywood talent to stop working with the company, shaved more than $4 billion off its market value last week.
The group wants any materials that estimate the effect of Kimmel’s suspension on Disney’s revenue, as well as documents that lay out how executives are supposed to make decisions around “politically sensitive programming.” It also wants copies of Disney’s agreements with affiliate networks Nexstar and Sinclair, whose initial threats to black out Kimmel’s show appear to have sparked his suspension; emails between board members, including CEO Bob Iger; and any communications between the company and federal government or political organizations.
“Although we are pleased that ABC did the right thing and put Jimmy Kimmel back on the air last night, due to the Trump administration’s continued threats to free speech, including with respect to ABC, we are writing to seek transparency into the initial decision to suspend him and his show,” the letter said.
“There is a credible basis to suspect that the Board and executives may have breached their fiduciary duties of loyalty, care, and good faith by placing improper political or affiliate considerations above the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.”
Shareholders in Delaware, where Disney is legally based, can demand corporate “books and records” to investigate potential wrongdoing, and such demands can lead to lawsuits. But their access generally is limited to matters involving the board of directors, not day-to-day management decisions made by company executives. Communications between, for example, Iger, Disney TV chief Dana Walden, and Kimmel would likely be off-limits, and aren’t sought by the group’s letter.
Definitely financially motivated, and not out of ur the goodness of their own hearts.
You’re not wrong. On the other hand, the more that it can start to be seen that siding with Trump’s bullshit is a catastrophe that will get you in trouble with your friends, instead of just some sort of abstracted sin against the country and constitution, I think the better.
What they’ll end up doing is creating a government/private hybrid network where taxpayers give money to Disney to create “wholesome American content”. Like the Nazis did.
The simple fact is that when it comes to corporations, that’s the only way to force changes. The Shareholders ultimately decide who runs the company and whether it is acting in their interests. Disney’s comparatively small fuck up here with Kimmel (compared to the entire empire) has cost the company millions in lost profit from subscription cancellations alone and an untold amount of goodwill worldwide, which indirectly equates to lost profits for years. Losses way more impactful than the small piece of the pie that is the show on ABC.
Definitely financially motivated, and not out of ur the goodness of their own hearts.
“Shareholders” in the headline was the giveaway
Worth noting this bit from the footnotes of the article though:
The letter was organized in conjunction with the Democracy Defenders Fund, a nonprofit watchdog group founded by Norman Eisen, a former Obama aide and the author of the anti-Trump Substack The Contrarian
I dont agree here. Other relevant parts you skipped:
A group of Disney shareholders are demanding…
A group, not all.
The letter was organized in conjunction with the Democracy Defenders Fund, a nonprofit watchdog group founded by Norman Eisen, a former Obama aide and the author of the anti-Trump Substack The Contrarian.
And there it is. The questions they are asking forces the release of information that will make all shareholders (who are the people you are describing) unhappy. This makes things difficult for executives making these decisions, thus making it more likely they won’t do it again.
I wonder if they ended up making more money for the suspension. I haven’t ever watched a Jimmy Kimmel monologue, but I watched that one. And I would be open to watching more in the future. Just because of how relevant it is.
I watched, but I have zero interest in watching him again. It was basically just comedy slop, the only joke that landed for me was the “I agreed to read this statement, to renew your subscription…”
But based on the fact I never would have watched him, and some people would probably find him funny, it’s got to be a net positive - 6 days for global exposure? That’s the holy Grail of marketing
This is not a net positive. It’s some damage control but people are going to remember that they rolled over for facism and not renew their subscriptions.
The extra views Jimmy Kimmel will have this week will not recover the lost revenue from the people who cancelled their subscriptions and won’t return.
Most relevant parts:
Definitely financially motivated, and not out of ur the goodness of their own hearts.
You’re not wrong. On the other hand, the more that it can start to be seen that siding with Trump’s bullshit is a catastrophe that will get you in trouble with your friends, instead of just some sort of abstracted sin against the country and constitution, I think the better.
Not just your friends. If it can cost you your job or ruin your month, suddenly capitulation hurts
What they’ll end up doing is creating a government/private hybrid network where taxpayers give money to Disney to create “wholesome American content”. Like the Nazis did.
Unlike the Corporation for Public Broadcasting?
Disney✝️
I fear the best we can hope for is that people do the right things, not that they do then for the right reasons.
The simple fact is that when it comes to corporations, that’s the only way to force changes. The Shareholders ultimately decide who runs the company and whether it is acting in their interests. Disney’s comparatively small fuck up here with Kimmel (compared to the entire empire) has cost the company millions in lost profit from subscription cancellations alone and an untold amount of goodwill worldwide, which indirectly equates to lost profits for years. Losses way more impactful than the small piece of the pie that is the show on ABC.
Maybe they need to do the same with Nexstar & Sinclair. I understand Sinclair is in debt over 4 times its market cap.
And they bought back shares from the tax rebates the last time we did this dumbass dance…
dint they lose billions, not millions, just from the kimmel thing alone.
THe colbert situation pretty much primed the situation to be worst.
Probably, I was being conservative on the estimate, and Disney will never admit it. They’ll find ways to hide the actual impact in other minutiae.
“Shareholders” in the headline was the giveaway
Worth noting this bit from the footnotes of the article though:
I dont agree here. Other relevant parts you skipped:
A group, not all.
And there it is. The questions they are asking forces the release of information that will make all shareholders (who are the people you are describing) unhappy. This makes things difficult for executives making these decisions, thus making it more likely they won’t do it again.
Tagging repliers for discussion: @[email protected] @[email protected]
I wonder if they ended up making more money for the suspension. I haven’t ever watched a Jimmy Kimmel monologue, but I watched that one. And I would be open to watching more in the future. Just because of how relevant it is.
they lost billions.
I watched, but I have zero interest in watching him again. It was basically just comedy slop, the only joke that landed for me was the “I agreed to read this statement, to renew your subscription…”
But based on the fact I never would have watched him, and some people would probably find him funny, it’s got to be a net positive - 6 days for global exposure? That’s the holy Grail of marketing
This is not a net positive. It’s some damage control but people are going to remember that they rolled over for facism and not renew their subscriptions.
The extra views Jimmy Kimmel will have this week will not recover the lost revenue from the people who cancelled their subscriptions and won’t return.
Oh I’m just talking about his show… Yeah, Disney is definitely going to suffer for this one
Well, yeah. Why else would shareholders sue a company?